COMBINACIÓN DE RAYAS CENTRALES LONGITUDINALES CONTINUAS Y DISCONTINUAS: Indican lo mismo que las anteriores, pero

Literatures on protected areas (Mose, 2007, Hammer, 2007a) suggest that Nature Parks in the twenty-first century are struggling to meet up with the challenges of complex structural

126

changes witnessed by rural areas as a result of declining traditional development policies. Clinching on the different strategies described in chapter four, it is certain that approaches applied for the development of park areas have brought forth recognisable changes on existing systems (economic and ecological) while maintaining location status. As instruments of sustainable development (Ministry of Interior and Spatial Planning, Luxembourg, 2005), the two official Nature Parks in Luxembourg are theoretically expected to contribute to, and coordinate regional projects; introduce innovative approaches of land management; motivate economic and social transformation with integrated environmental perspectives, as well as promoting a sort of regional governance through participation and collaboration. It is clear from empirical explanations in previous chapters that coordinating regional development is not possible in parks due to limited administrative powers. As such, to promote innovation and diversification, parks are left with one main target; contributing to sustainable regional development (low-intensity objective of sustainable development).

There is a silver of optimism that Nature Parks in Luxembourg are on track to realize the low- intensity objective of sustainable regional development, as seen from contributions in projects related to nature protection and economic development for example. Low-intensity objectives simply bring out the contributions parks make to the region‟s economy in the three dimensions of sustainable development; the pillar approach (Hammer, 2007a). This has been made evident by the research findings on certain contributions related to aspects such as environmental education for green skill development, advice on agricultural practices as well as, the management of biodiversity for air, soil and water quality. In exploring these tasks, Nature Parks are in essence stimulating a regional green economy in the integrated context of UNEP (2011), and re-establishing fresh values in areas where more than 60% of the total land surface is used for agricultural production. Moreover, the above actions in these parks confer with Steurer‟s (2011) view on the green economy. That is, a local green economy is achieved

127

by investing in eco-friendly activities that combine long-term economic and ecologically prerequisites related to sustainable development.

Contributing to regional development adds value to regional activities and this aspect is highly crucial in defining the role (success and failure) of protected areas as integrated instruments for development (Mose and Weixlbaumer, 2007). Features of economic development are helping Nature Parks in defining this role. That is, promoting small and medium size eco-friendly cooperatives and sustainable production and consumption practices, including a reasonable marketing strategy, are all integrated activities bringing new impetus and acting in favour of Nature Parks.

Besides, Nature Parksin Luxembourg have been increasing efforts to raise strategies that help local areas maintain status as modelled landscapes for promoting sustainable integrated development. Survey results have revealed that although there are obstacles partly due to inadequate knowledge about the concept of Nature Park by certain local stakeholders, parks are struggling to overcome these. New patterns and processes for awareness building about the combination of traditional and contemporary approaches of regional development have been introduced. These strategies are trying to level the high expectations of local stakeholders about the modifications parks will bring to rural areas, not only in terms of biodiversity and nature management but also in relation to social wellbeing. The transformation of traditional crops and grains into finished products are all integrated projects that have led to the creation of new niches for the marketing of parks‟ products. Jungmeir et al. (2006) cautioned this notion, underlining that these are the frequently neglected effects of protected area development.

Moreover, local producers in park areas are trying to ensure that local economic systems conserve natural resources while at the same time balancing out the social dimensions of

128

sustainable development. Through this, Nature Parks are trying greatly in integrating policies for sustainable regional development (German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation-Bfn, 2013), especially as social features have become a central responsibility for protected areas (Hammer, 2007a). The research findings have shown that social elements of regional development in Nature Parks in Luxembourg are still lacking in terms of outcomes (mainly job creation) and therefore contradict the social principle of the concept of green economy as perceived by Boons (2011) and Cato (2009). Both authors have ascertained that the green economy is a better approach for organising procedures for social development through job creation. However, by trying to combine functions of protection and economic development, certain aspects of social transformation are being realised. That is, education for green skills‟ development in local primary and secondary schools and access to essential services (making available basic food and non-food items) are simple feasible social qualities even though not significantly recognised as a major impact of parks‟ policies (refer to table four in the result chapter).

Furthermore, the term “instrument” of sustainable regional development linked to discussions about the role of Nature Parks in reforming traditional development strategies is plagued by certain dualism. On one hand, parks are connected to development objectives and on the other; they are related to nature protection. Theoretical realities from Luxembourg‟s Nature Park models depict parks as sustainably constructed spaces that consistently strike to generate greater awareness about a change from a concept of pure conservation that segregates to a one that integrates. Tea production in the Upper Sûre Nature Park, for example, is an economic activity which takes into consideration ecological aspects of water protection. Also, beef production still in this Nature Park is another integrated activity that reduces production cycles and maintains a regional flow of income between local producers. The same holds for the cooking oil in the Our Nature Park. This is a complement of Hammer‟s, notion (2007b),

129

on the strength of twenty-first century protected areas in combining sustainable strategies. This could be further explained using the figures below.

Source: Adapted from Jungmeier et al. 2006

As seen from figure 23 above, disintegrated activities are not always targeting the aims of sustainable development. In such a case, initiatives from interest groups will either favour protection or development objectives. Therefore, having stronger policies on how to combine elements of production with those of social prosperity and environmental conservation will distinguish Nature Park regions in Luxembourg and set standards for sustainable local development in these areas (Clement, et al. 2003). The Upper Sûre Nature Park is trying to promote integrated development (figures 24 and 25), by combining strategies of agriculture, regional marketing, and environmental education, including regional networking. It can be

Protection Development Integrated Activities Sustainable Region Development Protection Sustainable Region Disintegrated Activities

Figure 23: Disintegrated Activities

130

seen from the diagram below that the scheme is a bit missing about social development (job creation).

Figure 25: Representation of integrated development in the Upper Sûre Nature Park

Source, Adapted from Upper Sure nature Park

Field (2008) confirms that integrated strategies such as those endeavoured in regional projects in the Upper Sûre Nature Park simulate the approach of “pure scientific preservation”. This is an approach to analyse and avoid conflict over development and conservation using sound scientific tools, especially tools of natural resource science that reflects practical realities of local development (tools comprise; land use management skills; techniques for decision- making and analytical knowledge; policy development and implementation; resource planning and policy analysis; social and environmental impact analysis). However, as indicated in the results chapter, some of these techniques, especially social impact analysis is insufficiently represented or absent in our study areas. To practically function as an instrument for integrated regional development, Nature Parks in Luxembourg have to embark

131

on an approach in which all strategies are simultaneously sustainable both individually and collectively. These are important complements for modernising traditional development strategies and generally for greening local economies.

Also, although there are conflicting ideas in park areas on how to promote integrated strategies in the framework of green economy and sustainable development, provoked mainly by differences in expectations, infrastructure-based understanding of development or just simply management incompetence, stakeholders have always tried to eliminate trade-offs. That is, efforts are always towards encouraging production practices which combine nature protection and economic development. We draw again on strategies encouraging the sustainable production of food and non-food items in both parks. As integrative protected areas for humans and nature, it is important that Nature Parks are combining protection and use functions within the meaning of sustainable development (Europarc Foundation, 2013). This is necessary to ensure that economic activities in park areas are not carried out perforce at the expense of rural ecosystems and social prosperity (UNEP, 2011).

Moreover, as explained above, findings from this research have revealed that policies for social development do not level environmental and economic strategies. Using this as a background argument, it might be very difficult to accept the integrated approach of Nature Parks if the welfare of the local population is ignored. This is because, leaving out the social dimension does not reflect the notion of pure scientific conservation explained above and because a green economy should improve social wellbeing (UNEP, 2011).

On the other hand, integrated development strategies that consider social perspectives is referred to as the “worth living integrated development” (Koroneos and Rokos, 2012). Such an approach is expected to combine protection and development purposes through various

132

green activities to improve economic, social and environmental scopes of sustainable development in park areas. In this way, the economic priorities in Nature Parks will reconcile objectives of social development, alongside needs for nature protection. As such, attempting to understand and practice sustainable development in a limited context without concrete reality for the manifestation of positive social effects is a major setback for Luxembourg‟s Nature Parks‟ policies. Although there is a necessity to upgrade social performances, stakeholders in Nature Parks in Luxembourg are trying to adhere to the values related to this objective as certain environmental and economic policies put emphasis on creating green jobs to improve the lives of vulnerable local individuals.